TASK: fact-check, revise, and cite

The target article is written from author's memory and some facts may be unreliable. Check factual statements against source of truth

• if statements are factually inaccurate, revise them
• add citations

TARGET

SOURCE OF TRUTH

Concerning factual information, you should:

• base your answer on authoritative sources
  • for software
    • official docs (preferred)
    • trusted 3rd party docs
    • source code (if available, for questions not covered by docs)
  • for science
    • peer-reviewed journal articles (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, or domain-specific repositories like arXiv – but treat preprints as less authoritative than peer-reviewed)
    • official reports and consensus statements from recognized scientific bodies (e.g., WHO, IPCC, NASA, national academies of science, CDC, Inserm, CNRS, ANSES)
    • established textbooks or encyclopedias (e.g., Springer Nature, Elsevier reference works, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) – preferred over general wikis
    • primary research data or institutional repositories (e.g., Zenodo, Dryad) when cited alongside a peer-reviewed analysis
  • for law (statutes, regulations, case law, treaties)
    • official government gazettes and codified statutes (e.g., for France: Légifrance – the official public service for French law; for the EU: EUR-Lex – the official EU law database)
    • official court websites or authorized repositories (e.g., for France: decisions of the Cour de cassation, Conseil d'État, and Conseil constitutionnel published on Légifrance or their respective official sites; for the EU: judgments of the CJEU published on Curia)
    • trusted legal databases that cite official sources (e.g., Doctrine.fr, Dalloz – noting they are secondary commentary; for the EU: e.g., EU law in force via EUR-Lex)
    • international and treaty law sources (e.g., UN Treaty Collection, ICJ judgments, official WTO documents – but for EU treaties, use EUR-Lex; for French treaties, use the official JORF ratification texts)
    • Note: legal blogs, news articles, or unofficial summaries may be used only if you clearly label them as secondary commentary and prioritise the primary legal text
  • for administrative rules and agency guidance
    • official registers and codified rules (e.g., for France: the Journal officiel de la République française – JORF – and the consolidated codes on Légifrance; for the EU: the Official Journal of the European Union – OJEU – and the consolidated regulatory acts on EUR-Lex)
    • official agency websites (e.g., for France: ARCEP, ANSM, CNIL, AMF, ANAP – especially their official deliberations, decisions, and guidance; for the EU: EMA, ECHA, ESMA, EBA, EFSA – final rules, Q&As, and guidance documents)
    • formal public consultations, impact assessments, and notices published in the respective official bulletins or registers
    • administrative tribunal or court decisions that interpret those rules (e.g., rulings of the French Conseil d'État or EU General Court regarding implementing acts)
• if no authoritative sources are available, you can answer from other sources (other internet pages, your own knowledge, etc.). Warn the user that you answered from less-reliable sources, and the answer may contain factual error.
• be transparent about your source
  • if the user asked a question: state the sources in your answer
    • say "based on X, ...; based on Y, ..."
  • if the user asked you to write, include references
    • IMPORTANT: follow style conventions if a style guide is provided or examples are given. Don't assume [1][2] is the right style
      • e.g., some articles may only require listing sources in a "References" section without inline citation, some require both.
• not guess — If you don't know, say so: "I don't have expertise in X / I haven't found reliable information on X"